Incidence and characteristics of vaginal cuff dehiscence in robotic-assisted and traditional total laparoscopic hysterectomy

This study compares the incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence following robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH) with total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and examines factors that may be related to risk. A retrospective chart review was performed for all patients undergoing RALH (n?=?268), TLH (n?=?463), and/or repair of vaginal cuff dehiscence at our clinic from July 2006 to January 2010. The cumulative incidence was calculated only for dehiscence that occurred after hysterectomies without evidence of malignancy. The incidence of cuff dehiscence in RALH (2.61%) versus TLH (1.94%) was not statistically significant (P?=?0.60). However, among RALH patients, the overall incidence of cuff dehiscence after each surgeon??s first 25 cases was low at 0.85%. Mean time to presentation was similar in both groups, 8.2?weeks in RALH and 8.7?weeks in TLH, with sexual intercourse the most common inciting event. Where documented, records of dehisced patients showed that all colpotomy incisions were created using monopolar cautery and closed using 0 Vicryl sutures. In TLH, 87.5% of the colpotomy incisions were closed using the Endo Stitch device in a variety of fashions. While our findings show that the overall incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence in RALH and TLH is comparable, the data also suggest that increased experience with robotic-assisted surgery may decrease dehiscence rates over time. Randomized controlled trials comparing different methods of colpotomy creation, particularly electrocautery, and cuff closure are needed to help guide us in the best surgical practices to reduce vaginal cuff dehiscence and related complications.     

Single-port hysterectomy: robotic versus laparoscopic

This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of robotic single port hysterectomy and laparoscopic single port hysterectomy, and to compare the perioperative parameters of the two systems. Twenty patients underwent robotic single port hysterectomy and 25 patients underwent laparoscopic single port hysterectomy. All hysterectomies were successfully performed via a single port and there were no conversions to conventional multi-port laparoscopy, multi-port robotic, open surgery, or vaginal surgery. The median operative time and hysterectomy time in robotic and laparoscopic groups were 90 vs. 90 min (P 0.74), 57.5 vs. 60 min (P 0.17), respectively. The median estimated blood loss was 40 ml in the robotic group and 50 ml in the laparoscopic group (P 0.77). No operative and post-operative complications were observed in the two groups. The median time to discharge from the hospital was one day for both techniques (P 0.17). Robotic and laparoscopic single port systems are feasible and safe for hysterectomy operation in terms of operative time, conversion to laparotomy or multiport laparoscopy/robotic rates, complication rates, and postoperative results in the hands of experienced surgeons. The possible benefits of robotic single port surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy should be evaluated in further randomized controlled studies.     

Laparoscopic versus robotic right colectomy: a single surgeon’s experience

There is increased interest in robotic techniques for colon resection, but the role of robotics in colorectal surgery has not yet been defined. The purpose of this study was to compare our recent experience with robotic right colectomy to that with laparoscopic right colectomy. From November 2008 to June 2011, a total of 47 consecutive patients underwent elective, right colectomy: 25 laparoscopic right colectomies (LRC) and 22 robotic right colectomies (RRC). All procedures in this study were performed by a single, board-certified colon and rectal surgeon (H.J.L.). Main outcomes recorded included conversion rate, operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of extraction sites, length of stay (LOS), and complications. Data studied were prospectively recorded in a database and were retrospectively reviewed. Mean OT for LRC was 107 ± 36.7 min (median 98, range 48–207) and for RRC was 189.1 ± 38.1 min (median 185, range 123–288, P < 0.001). Mean total operating room time (TORT) for LRC was 158.6 ± 38.1 min (median 149, range 104–274) and for RRC was 258.3 ± 40.9 (median 251, range 182–372, P < 0.001). The tendency lines for both OT and TORT decreased over time for RRC. EBL for LRC was 70.2 ± 52.9 ml (median 50, range 10–200) and for RRC was 60.8 ± 71.3 ml (median 40, range 10–300, P = 0.037). The mean extraction site length for the laparoscopic group was 5.3 ± 1.3 cm (median 5, range 4–11) and for the robotic group was 4.6 ± 0.7 cm (median 4.5, range 3.5–6, p = 0.008). LOS was similar for both groups, as were complications. No cases were converted to open. No leaks occurred and there was no 30-day mortality. RRC is safe and feasible, with similar outcomes to LRC. Operative times were longer for RRC; however, they compare favorably with times for LRC published in the literature. Extraction site length and EBL were less for RRC. However, further study is necessary to demonstrate the clinical relevance of these findings. We are optimistic that OT and TORT will continue to improve.     

Analysis of postoperative pain in robotic versus traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy

The aim of this study was to assess postoperative pain and narcotic use in the first 23 h following robotic versus traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign pathology. The study design was that of a retrospective case–control study of robotic (first 100 consecutive) versus traditional (last 100 consecutive) total laparoscopic hysterectomy cases at an obstetrics and gynecology multi-institutional community practice. Patient characteristics were equivalent in both groups (age, p = 0.364; body mass index, p = 0.326; uterine weight, p = 0.565), except for a higher number of Caucasians in the traditional laparoscopic group (p = 0.017). Compared to patients who underwent robotic laparoscopic hysterectomy, those who underwent the traditional procedure had higher visual analog scale pain scores (3.1 ± 1.5 vs. 4.6 ± 2.4, respectively; p < 0.001) and used more narcotics (27.5 vs. 35.4 mg hydrocodone, respectively; p < 0.05). Factors that could potentially increase pain (more procedures, more ports, total incision size, and longer operative time) were significantly higher in the robotic group, but only surgical approach, amount of narcotic, and age correlated with pain levels when evaluated with regression analysis. Complication rates were equivalent between groups. In conclusion, patients who underwent robotic assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy had statistically decreased postoperative pain scores and narcotic use than those who underwent the traditional laparoscopic approach, even when the robotic cases involved more procedures and ports and were associated with longer operative time.     

Health care cost consequences of using robot technology for hysterectomy: a register-based study of consecutive patients during 2006–2013

The objective of this study is to examine the costs attributable to robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy from a broad healthcare sector perspective in a register-based longitudinal study. The population in this study were 7670 consecutive women undergoing hysterectomy between January 2006 and August 2013 in public hospitals in Denmark. The interventions in the study were total and radical hysterectomy performed robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH), total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH), or open abdominal hysterectomy (OAH). Service use in the healthcare sector was evaluated 1 year before to 1 year after the surgery. Tariffs of the activity-based remuneration system and the diagnosis-related grouping case-mix system were used for valuation of primary and secondary care, respectively. Costs attributable to RALH were estimated using a difference-in-difference analytical approach and adjusted using multivariate linear regression. The main outcome measure was costs attributable to OAH, TLH, and RALH. For benign conditions RALH generated cost savings of € 2460 (95% CI 845; 4075) per patient compared to OAH and non-significant cost savings of € 1045 (95% CI ?200; 2291) when compared with TLH. In cancer patients RALH generated cost savings of 3445 (95% CI 415; 6474) per patient when compared to OAH and increased costs of € 3345 (95% CI 2348; 4342) when compared to TLH. In cancer patients undergoing radical hysterectomy, RALH generated non-significant extra costs compared to OAH. Cost consequences were primarily due to differences in the use of inpatient service. There is a cost argument for using robot technology in patients with benign disease. In patients with malignant disease, the cost argument is dependent on comparator.     

Evaluation of the learning curve of total robotic hysterectomy with or without lymphadenectomy for a gynecologic oncology service

We sought to determine the learning curve for total robotic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (TRH, BSO) with/without lymphadenectomy (LND) for a gynecologic oncology service. Data was collected prospectively and included demographics, surgical data, and timed data points to calculate times for the following categories: total operating room (OR) time, setup time, hysterectomy (HYST) time, lymphadenectomy (LND) time, and console time. Cases were grouped into tens by chronological order and compared. A risk-adjusted cumulative sum (CUSUM) model was used to evaluate learning curves for hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy. The first 155 patients are reported. Average HYST time was 45.2 min and average LND time was 52.4 min. Cases were grouped by each consecutive 10 cases per surgeon (i.e. Group 1 = cases 1?C10 for each surgeon). All groups were similar with respect to age, body mass index, stage, grade, cancer type, number of lymph nodes, and uterine weight. All times significantly improved with the increase in number of cases: total OR time (P < 0.001); setup time (P = 0.004); HYST time (P = 0.001); LND time (P = 0.05); console time (P = 0.05). CUSUM analysis demonstrated a learning curve of 14 cases for HYST time and 19 cases for lymphadenectomy. Our data describes the robotic laparoscopic learning curves for both hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy in a gynecologic oncology practice and could be utilized for hospital credentialing. The amount of experience required to achieve maximum time efficiency for robotic lymphadenectomy was greater than that for hysterectomy. A significant improvement was observed in all timed data points collected, and the time to proficiency appears reasonable.     

Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair

Despite growing popularity and potential advantages of robotics in general surgery, there is very little published data regarding robotic inguinal hernia repair. This study examines a single surgeon’s early experience with robotic TAPP inguinal hernia repair compared with laparoscopic TAPP repair in terms of feasibility and cost. We performed a retrospective review of 63 consecutive patients (24 laparoscopic and 39 robotic) who underwent inguinal hernia repair between December 2012–December 2014 at a single institution by a single surgeon. Data examined included gender, age, BMI, operative times, recovery room times, pain scale ratings, and cost. Patient groups were the same in terms of age and BMI. The mean operative time (77.5 vs 60.7 min, p = 0.001) and room time (109.3 vs 93.0 min, p = 0.001) were significantly longer for the robotic vs the laparoscopic patients. Recovery room time (109.1 vs 133.5 min, p = 0.026) and average pain scores in recovery (2.5 vs 3.8, p = 0.02) were significantly less for the robotic group. The average direct cost of the laparoscopic group was $3216 compared with $3479 for the robotic group. The average contribution margin for the laparoscopic group was $2396 compared with $2489 for the robotic group. Robotic TAPP inguinal hernia repair had longer operative times, but patients spent less time in recovery and noted less pain than patients who underwent laparoscopic TAPP inguinal hernia repair. The direct cost and contribution margin are nearly equivalent. These results should allow the continued investigation of this technique without concern over excess cost.     

Comparison of minimally invasive surgical approaches for hysterectomy at a community hospital: robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy,laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy

The study reported here compares outcomes of three approaches to minimally invasive hysterectomy for benign indications, namely, robotic-assisted laparoscopic (RALH), laparoscopic-assisted vaginal (LAVH) and laparoscopic supracervical (LSH) hysterectomy. The total patient cohort comprised the first 237 patients undergoing robotic surgeries at our hospital between August 2007 and June 2009; the last 100 patients undergoing LAVH by the same surgeons between July 2006 and February 2008 and 165 patients undergoing LAVHs performed by nine surgeons between January 2008 and June 2009; 87 patients undergoing LSH by the same nine surgeons between January 2008 and June 2009. Among the RALH patients were cases of greater complexity: (1) higher prevalence of prior abdominopelvic surgery than that found among LAVH patients; (2) an increased number of procedures for endometriosis and pelvic reconstruction. Uterine weights also were greater in RALH patients [207.4 vs. 149.6 (LAVH; P < 0.001) and 141.1 g (LSH; P = 0.005)]. Despite case complexity, operative time was significantly lower in RALH than in LAVH (89.9 vs. 124.8 min, P < 0.001) and similar to that in LSH (89.6 min). Estimated blood loss was greater in LAVH (167.9 ml) than in RALH (59.0 ml, P < 0.001) or LSH (65.7 ml, P < 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter for RALH than for LAVH or LSH. Conversion and complication rates were low and similar across procedures. Multivariable regression indicated that LAVH, obesity, uterine weight ≥250 g and older age predicted significantly longer operative time. The learning curve for RALH demonstrated improved operative time over the case series. Our findings show the benefits of RALH over LAVH. Outcomes in RALH can be as good as or better than those in LSH, suggesting the latter should be the choice primarily for women desiring cervix-sparing surgery.     

Perioperative outcomes of three-port robotically assisted hysterectomy: a continuous series of 53 cases

This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of 3-port robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH), using a consecutive series of women who underwent 3-port RALH in a university hospital. From November 2010 until June 2013 we operated on 53 women, whose mean age was 48.4 ± 7.7 years (range 35–68 years), and mean body mass index was 27.1 ± 5.1 kg/m² (range 19.5–42.9 kg/m²). The indications for hysterectomy were myoma in 31 (58.5 %), adenomyosis in 10 (18.9 %), cervical dysplasia in 4 (7.5 %), neoplasia in 4 (7.5 %), and recurrent polyps or postmenopausal bleeding in the remaining 4 women (7.5 %). We performed total RALH in 50 cases (94.3 %) and subtotal in the others. The median duration of total intervention was 169 min (interquartile range 147.5–206.5 min). The mean weight of the uterus was 209.8 ± 166.6 g (range 36–790 g) and mean estimated blood loss was 72.3 ± 75.9 ml (range 0–300 ml). There were no perioperative complications, in particular no blood transfusions nor conversions to laparotomy. The median hospital stay was 4 days (interquartile range 3–4 days). One patient was reoperated 1 month later for vaginal vault hematoma and another was readmitted 3 weeks post-operatively due to vaginal vault dehiscence after premature intercourse, but did not require reoperation. Three-port RALH is feasible and safe for simple hysterectomy. We believe this experience using minimum ports to be useful to prepare for robotically assisted single-port hysterectomy.     

Progressive reduction in abdominal hysterectomy rates: impact of laparoscopy,robotics and surgeon factors

The objective of this study is to describe changes in rates of types of hysterectomy at a tertiary care community teaching hospital since the introduction of laparoscopic and robotic techniques and to determine the effect of surgeon characteristics on route of hysterectomy. This is a retrospective analysis of types of hysterectomies performed for benign disease during five different years (1989, 1994, 1999, 2004, 2009) at a large community teaching hospital. Hospital discharge data was reviewed to identify all hysterectomies performed during the first six months of each year of the study. Hospital charts were reviewed and patient characteristics, indication for surgery, type of hysterectomy and surgeon characteristics were recorded. Hysterectomies performed for malignancy, suspected malignancy, or postpartum hemorrhage were excluded. Types of hysterectomies included abdominal (AH), vaginal (VH), laparoscopic-assisted vaginal (LAVH), total laparoscopic (TLH), laparoscopic supracervical (LSH) and robotic-assisted (RH). The progressive introduction of newer minimally invasive surgical techniques (LAVH, TLH, LSH, and RH) resulted in an overall reduction in the abdominal hysterectomy rate from 77 to 35.2 % during the time of the study. The majority of abdominal, laparoscopic supracervical and robotic hysterectomies were performed by generalists, while the majority of vaginal, laparoscopic-assisted vaginal and total laparoscopic hysterectomies were performed by fellowship trained subspecialists. Minimally invasive hysterectomy techniques significantly reduced the rate of abdominal hysterectomies. The LSH and RH were the techniques utilized by generalists as their most preferred minimally invasive surgical approaches to hysterectomy.     

Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass: Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes

Background

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is an effective treatment for severe obesity and obesity-related comorbidities. Presently, gastric bypass is performed most often laparoscopically, although a robotic-assisted procedure is the preferred approach for an increasing number of bariatric surgeons.

Methods

This retrospective study compared the results of 100 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass operations using the da Vinci robot and 100 laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses performed laparoscopically. Short-term outcomes were determined by evaluating mortality, length of stay, length of operation, return to the operating room within 90 days of operation, conversions to open procedure, leaks, strictures, transfusions, and hospital readmissions.

Results

There was no mortality, pulmonary embolus, or conversion to open procedure in either group. Both the laparoscopic and robotic operative times decreased progressively, although the robotic operation time was longer (mean, 144 versus 87 min, P?<?0.001). The length of stay was shorter for the robotic-assisted group (37 versus 52 h, P?<?0.001), and 60 % of these patients were discharged after one night’s stay (P?<?0.001). There were fewer transfusions (P?=?0.005) and readmissions (P?=?.560) in the robotic group. The stricture rate was higher in the first 50 robotic procedures (17 mm gastrotomy) but resolved in the second 50 procedures (21 mm gastrotomy). There was no difference in the rate of leak and return to the operating room between groups (both P?>?0.05).

Conclusions

These results indicate that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass can be performed safely with robotic assistance, even during the first 100 cases.     

Laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy with hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse

Introduction and hypothesis

Treating pelvic organ prolapse (POP) with uterine conservation and sacral hysteropexy has uncertain subjective and objective outcomes. We sought to compare laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy/total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH with LSC).

Methods

Clinical data of 34 patients who underwent TLH with LSC and 65 patients who underwent laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy performed by the same group of surgeons between January 2008 and December 2013 were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome was subjective satisfaction rate based upon validated questionnaire (Patient Global Impression of Change [PGI-C]). Secondary outcomes were: anatomical cure, impact on quality of life based upon validated questionnaires (pelvic floor distress inventory-short form 20 [PFDI-20], Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire 7 [PFIQ-7], and Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12 [PISQ-12]), surgical complications, and cost.

Results

After a mean follow-up of 33 months, the subjective satisfaction rate was significantly higher in the TLH with LSC cohort (92.3 % vs 100 %; p?<?0.001). The POP-Q scores in both groups were significantly improved postoperatively. However, the anatomical cure in the two groups (72.3 % vs 88.2 %; p?=?0.07) did not differ significantly The postoperative PFIQ-7 and PFDI-20 scores were significantly better in the TLH with LSC cohort than in the laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy cohort (p?=?0.043 and p?=?0.035 respectively).

Conclusions

Relative to laparoscopic sacral hysteropexy, the TLH with LSC approach provides similar anatomical results, excellent patient satisfaction, and improved quality of life scores.

     

Comparison of open,laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for total abdominal colectomy

Background

The utilization of minimally invasive surgery is increasing in colorectal surgery. We sought to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent elective open, laparoscopic, and robotic total abdominal colectomy.

Methods

The NIS database was used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent an elective total colectomy procedure during 2009–2012. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

Results

We sampled a total of 26,721 patients who underwent elective total colectomy. Of these, 16,780 (62.8 %) had an open operation, while 9934 (37.2 %) had a minimally invasive approach (9614 laparoscopic surgery, and 326 robotic surgery). The most common indication for an operation was ulcerative colitis (31 %). Patients who underwent open surgery had significantly higher mortality and morbidity compared to laparoscopic (AOR 2.48, 1.30, P < 0.01) and robotic approaches (AOR 1.04, 1.30, P < 0.01 and P = 0.04, respectively). There was no significant difference in mortality and morbidity between the laparoscopic and robotic approaches (AOR 0.96, 1.03, P = 0.10, P = 0.78). However, conversion rate of laparoscopic surgery to open was significantly higher than that of robotic approach (13.3 vs. 1.5 %, P < 0.01). Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery had significantly lower total hospital charges compared to patients who underwent open surgery (mean difference = $21,489, P < 0.01). Also, total hospital charges for a robotic approach were significantly higher than for a laparoscopic approach (mean difference = $15,595, P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Minimally invasive approaches to total colectomy are safe, with the advantage of lower mortality and morbidity compared to an open approach. Although there was no significant difference in the morbidity between minimally invasive approaches, robotic surgery had a significantly lower conversion rate compared to laparoscopic approach. Total hospital charges are significantly higher in robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic approach.

     

A Comparative Study of Outcomes Between Single-Site Robotic and Multi-port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: An Experience from a Tertiary Care Center

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of single-site robotic cholecystectomy with multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy within a high-volume tertiary health care center.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data was conducted on patients undergoing single-site robotic cholecystectomy or multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy between October 2011 and July 2014. A single surgeon performed all the surgeries included in the study.

Results

A total of 678 cholecystectomies were performed. Of these, 415 (61%) were single-site robotic cholecystectomies and 263 (39%) were multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Laparoscopic patients had a greater mean BMI (30.5 vs. 29.0 kg/m²; p = 0.008), were more likely to have undergone prior abdominal surgery (83.3 vs. 41.4%; p < 0.001) and had a higher incidence of preexisting comorbidities (76.1 vs. 67.2%; p = 0.014) as compared to the robotic group. There was no statistical difference in the total operative time, rate of conversion to open procedure and mean length of follow-up between the two groups. The mean length of hospital stay was shorter for patients within the robotic group (1.9 vs. 2.4 days; p = 0.012). Single-site robotic cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of wound infection (3.9 vs. 1.1%; p = 0.037) and incisional hernia (6.5 vs. 1.9%; p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy should remain the gold standard therapy for gallbladder disease. Single-site robotic cholecystectomy is an effective alternative procedure for uncomplicated benign gallbladder disease in properly selected patients. This must be carefully balanced against a high rate of surgical site infection and incisional hernia, and patients should be informed of these risks.

     

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a retrospective,single-center study of early perioperative outcomes at a community hospital

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the operative and early perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures performed in a community hospital setting.

Methods

The study was a chart review and analysis of the early perioperative outcomes of a total of 345 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures performed by a single surgeon in a community hospital setting from January 2011 to October 2014. Of these, 173 procedures were performed laparoscopically and 172 were performed with robotic assistance utilizing the daVinci^® surgical platform. Factors such as baseline patient characteristics, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), conversions to open procedure, complication rates, adverse events, length of stay (LOS), and return to the operating room for the two groups were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively maintained database. Student’s t test with unequal variances was used for statistical analysis, and a p value <0.05 was used for significance.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in complication rates, EBL, or LOS between the two groups. There was a significant difference between the total operative times (135.30 ± 37.60 min for the laparoscopic procedure versus 154.84 ± 38.44 min for the robotic procedure, p < 0.05). There were no adverse intraoperative events, conversions to open procedures, leaks, strictures, returns to the operating room within 30 days, or mortalities in either group.

Conclusion

Our study, which is the first of its kind to analyze the operative and early perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures in the US community hospital setting, indicates that both are comparable in terms of safety, efficacy, and operative and early perioperative outcomes.

     

Robotic-Assisted Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Conventional Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy

Objectives:

To compare patient characteristics, operative variables, and outcomes of 24 patients who underwent robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) with 44 patients who underwent conventional TLH. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 44 patients with TLH and 24 patients with robotic TLH.

Results:

Robotic TLH was associated with a shorter hospital stay (1.0 vs 1.4 days, P=0.011) and a significant decrease in narcotic use (1.2 vs 5.0 units, P=0.002). EBL and drop in hemoglobin were not significantly different. The operative time was significantly longer in patients undergoing robotic TLH (142.2 vs 122.1 minutes, P=0.027). However, only need for laparoscopic morcellation, BMI, and uterine weight, not robotic use, were independently associated with increased operative times.

Conclusions:

Robotic hysterectomy can be performed safely with comparable operative times to those of conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy. Postoperative measures were improved over measures for conventional laparoscopy.     

Comparative analysis of vaginal versus robotic-assisted hysterectomy for benign indications

We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted hysterectomy versus vaginal hysterectomy in patients with benign gynecologic conditions, using a retrospective chart review of 240 consecutive benign hysterectomies from May 2008 to April of 2010 performed by a single surgical team at the Eisenhower Medical Center. The analysis included an equal number of cases in each group: 120 robotic-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomies and 120 total vaginal hysterectomies. Consecutive cases met the inclusion criteria of benign disease. There were no statistically significant differences related to age, body mass index, history of prior abdominal surgery, or uterine weight. Operative times in the robotic group were significantly longer by an average of 59 min (p < 0.001). Patients with robotic-assisted hysterectomy had clinically equivalent estimated blood loss (55.5 ml vs. 84.7 ml, p < 0.001) and the intraoperative complication rates were 1.7% vaginal versus 0% robotic (p = 0.156). There was one conversion in the vaginal group due to pelvic adhesions and no conversions in the robotic group. Length of hospital stay was 1 day for both groups. The perioperative complication rates were equivalent between groups (6.7 vs. 11.7%, p = 0.180), but there were more major complications in the vaginal group (0 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.044). We conclude that, in a comparable group of patients, robotic-assisted hysterectomy takes longer to complete but results in fewer major complications.     

FLS tasks can be used as an ergonomic discriminator between laparoscopic and robotic surgery

Introduction

Robotic surgery may result in ergonomic benefits to surgeons. In this pilot study, we utilize surface electromyography (sEMG) to describe a method for identifying ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic platforms using validated Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) tasks. We hypothesize that FLS task performance on laparoscopic and robotic surgical platforms will produce significant differences in mean muscle activation, as quantified by sEMG.

Methods

Six right-hand-dominant subjects with varying experience performed FLS peg transfer (PT), pattern cutting (PC), and intracorporeal suturing (IS) tasks on laparoscopic and robotic platforms. sEMG measurements were obtained from each subject’s bilateral bicep, tricep, deltoid, and trapezius muscles. EMG measurements were normalized to the maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) of each muscle of each subject. Subjects repeated each task three times per platform, and mean values used for pooled analysis. Average normalized muscle activation (%MVC) was calculated for each muscle group in all subjects for each FLS task. We compared mean %MVC values with paired t tests and considered differences with a p value less than 0.05 to be statistically significant.

Results

Mean activation of right bicep (2.7 %MVC lap, 1.3 %MVC robotic, p = 0.019) and right deltoid muscles (2.4 %MVC lap, 1.0 %MVC robotic, p = 0.019) were significantly elevated during the laparoscopic compared to the robotic IS task. The mean activation of the right trapezius muscle was significantly elevated during robotic compared to the laparoscopic PT (1.6 %MVC lap, 3.5 %MVC robotic, p = 0.040) and PC (1.3 %MVC lap, 3.6 %MVC robotic, p = 0.0018) tasks.

Conclusions

FLS tasks are validated, readily available instruments that are feasible for use in demonstrating ergonomic differences between surgical platforms. In this study, we used FLS tasks to compare mean muscle activation of four muscle groups during laparoscopic and robotic task performance. FLS tasks can serve as the basis for larger studies to further describe ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic surgery.     

Does hospital setting post robotic fellowship training affect outcomes? A multi-institutional comparison of initial outcomes between academic and community settings

The effect of practice setting on skill development post robotic fellowship training is currently unknown. We sought to compare learning curves between a high-volume academic center and a similar volume community hospital, in the setting of building a new robotic prostatectomy program. In addition, we sought to characterize benchmarks for learning curve development for post-fellowship training in robotic surgery. At two institutions, one academic (AC) and the other in the community (CO), the first 150 patients who underwent robotic laparoscopic prostatectomy over a period of 1 year were evaluated. We compared the following outcomes, operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), and positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, by two surgeons. Both surgeons completed the same surgical robotic fellowship in the same year. Cases were divided by tertile and primary outcomes measures were compared. Demographic data were similar between the two groups. Statistical differences were seen in age, preoperative Sexual Health Inventory for Men score, clinical and pathologic stage, and bladder neck reconstruction rate (p < 0.05). Overall, there was no significant difference in OT between AC (174 min) and CO (181 min) (p = 0.1099). Both EBL and PSM were lower in the AC (155 vs. 197 ml, p < 0.001 and 10 vs. 26 %, p < 0.05). The difference in OT was significant only in the first tertile of cases (AC 168 min vs. CO 193 min, p = 0.002). However, OT increased by 13 min in AC and decreased by 22 min in CO, when comparing the first and last tertile. EBL was different between AC (161ml) and CO (212 ml) only in the first tertile of cases (p = 0.002). Both AC and CO had increased EBL over the last tertile of cases (16.2 vs. 26.5 ml, respectively). These results demonstrate minor differences in outcomes between the two practice settings. Fellowship training in robotic surgery demonstrates a shorter learning curve towards achieving proficiency. Larger and longer term series will be required to assess functional outcomes and time to proficiency.     

Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes

Purpose

This study was designed to compare robot-assisted gastrectomy with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy in surgical performance and short-term clinical outcomes for gastric cancer and evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic surgery.

Methods

A retrospective database of patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer between March 2010 and May 2013 was examined. After screening, 514 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer were enrolled in this study: 120 robotic and 394 laparoscopic surgery. Patient demographics, surgical performance, and short-term clinical outcomes were examined.

Results

All operations were performed successfully. The clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between the two groups. Compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had less intraoperative blood loss (118.3 ± 55.8 vs. 137.6 ± 61.6 ml, P < 0.001), more lymph nodes dissection (34.6 ± 10.9 vs. 32.7 ± 11.2, P = 0.013), and longer operation time (234.8 ± 42.4 vs. 221.3 ± 44.8 min, P = 0.003). The survival rates were 90.2 % at 1 year, 78.1 % at 2 years, and 67.8 % at 3 years in the RAG group compared with 87.3 % at 1 year, 77.1 % at 2 years, and 69.9 % at 3 years in the LAG group. The difference in overall survival rate between the two groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.812). In view of lymph node involvement, the 3-year survival rates for patients with negative nodal metastasis were 84.4 % in the RAG group versus 82.6 % in the LAG group (P = 0.972) and 57.5 % in the RAG group versus 60.3 % in the LADG group (P = 0.653) for those with positive nodal metastasis.

Conclusions

Comparing well with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy is a feasible and safe surgical procedure with clear operation field, precise dissection, minimal trauma, and fast recovery. Longer follow-up time and randomized, clinical trials are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits and long-term oncological outcomes of this new technology.